Goggles or face shields???

[THE TRUCKIE]

I need input. Now that NFPA approves goggles for firefighting use, I am trying to convince the Chief to let me try some. Here's my reasoning: 1. One good fire and the shield are useless and need to be replaced. 2. Their main use with SCBA is a "porch" to keep the rain (water off your facepiece). 3. For eye protection they a not much better than nothing. 5. The goggles can come off and stay on the unit during fire attack. 6. For rescue or mop-up ops they offer total eye protection. 7. Since I don't have to replace them after a hot smokey fire or every time the Fire Commission comes through, I have saved money. I NEED AMMO FOR THIS FIGHT!!

[ScottCook]

I love the goggles. I have them and bourkes on my helmet (1010). I leave the goggles on the truck at structure fires when I'm in SCBA.

Sounds like you have all the arguements you need. The one about total eye protection is my favorite. Buy your own and put them on with the faceshield (we had a guy do that with a 1010, they're under the faceshield) or at least carry them around so you'll have your own total eye protection like you said during rescue and mop up, and especially at grass fires. Soon they'll catch on.

[Wildfire]

First a bit of advice. Don't hunt for ammunition and don't make it a battle. We have enough battles to fight already without making one out of goggles. Meet with the chief and present your viewpoints intelligently. Ask for the opportunity to have a couple of the members trial the goggles during an evaluation period. Try a couple of different types, believe me there are major differences. Ask for feedback from the chief and explain the potential for cost savings which will show initiative on your part as a concerend firefighter and performance improvement on his part as the chief. Poll your firefighters and find out who may be interested in the goggles vs. the face shields. Go into this venture open minded. If you plan on going for a battle with ammunition, you've already lost before you had a chance to start. Chiefs don't like confrontation and will immediately defend their position even if they haven't heard the whole story or suggestion. On a side note, you said the goggles would stay on the rig during attack. Why? If you're looking at goggles, get them on your helmet. That's where they're gonna be used.

[FHandz17]

www.essgoggles.com/NFPA.html

Outlines primary and secondary eye protection compliance. Shields only can't be used (in theory) according to the NFPA.

We tried goggles on two or three guy's helmets, they liked the decreased weight and the better protection. Now we use Cairns ESS on all helmets, they look / work very well.

It takes a pretty hot fire to destroy them, we have had them survive several lately.

Anyway, my 2 cents.

[distchief60b]

Truckie....

You are on target...and yes..dont make it a battle...make it a project for the betterment of firefighter safety. Justify justify justify!!!!!!

The shields are of little use after one fire (you are exactly right) and they also do not provide eye protection that is adequate due to the distance from the face even though they are approved.

We sell the goggles as an option in place of the facechield on our CHIEFTAIN Helmets. It is becoming popular. The only drawback is that if the firefighter chooses to "keep" them on the helmet then after a few fires they too become discolored and vision is obscured.

But they are definitly an improvement over the shield and enhance firefighter safety.

Go at it from a safety angle!

[JoeMZ191]

A local department here received a violation and fine for having goggles on their helmets and not shields. MIOSHA(Michigan OSHA) does not recognize goggles, and probably Bourke shields, as adequate eye protection. I wore goggles for two years and only used them on extrications, no fires.

I can put you in touch with this department if you need specifics.

Joe

[ScottCook]

Logs, if you take/wear the goggles on the helmet in a structure fire, they'll end up as useless to see through as a shield. They stay on the helmet and removed on working fires.

[ 08-11-2001: Message edited by: S. Cook ]

[BonCreChief]

Convince me, give me proof,don't come to fight or with "ammunition", maybe I don't like face shields to start with. My point is that Chiefs are not necessarily the enemy and in most cases have been on both sides of this type of argument. What many firefighters may know but not really understand is
1. If I change a type of equipment and you get hurt I am always liable in a civil suit and sometimes criminally liable
2. I have some type of governmental authority I have to answer to. In most cases they don't know beans about firefighting all they know is the chief changed equipment and someone is hurt. I.E. OSHA
3 There is always some local governing board that controls my budget. Many firefighters may not know it but most chiefs can't buy any equipment without prior approval from that governing board
So if you want a change bring us proof, bring us the documentation that we can use this equipment without fear of legal action, and give us what we need to convince a board that this is a better financial buy. I don't know about your chief but if you do this for me I promise you I would listen.

By the way I really don't like face shields

[THE TRUCKIE]

Guess my choice of words wer not the best (ammunition). What I am really looking for is information. That I am getting. Goggles are a new idea in our part of the world. I appreciate the input. The NFPA is confusing. My Deputy Chief just came and asked me exactly what it said about sheilds and goggles.

[Ten8_Ten19]

I hope you get the chance to try them out. Our chief allows goggles and about a quarter of the crew are using them. I tried them for a few months and decided I wanted my shield back. I don't find them user friendly. Now I keep a pair of cheapie safety glasses in my pocket because I know shields are close to useless as primary eye protection.

The others have said it well, your chief needs to know they are safe, legal and cost-effective.

[ggtruckie]

I've used goggles, Facesheilds and safty glasses. I perfer the safty glasses for extricatin and things of that sort, I do like the goggles but some are very uncomfertable to wear, be sure to find the best most comfortable and members will actually use them.

[FHandz17]

Uhhh.......Once again, this oulines the eye protection standards. it quotes NFPA and ANSI standards.

Sheilds bad.....goggles good.

All the info you need.
www.essgoggles.com/NFPA.html

[Wildfire]

Your point is taken S. Cook, but I've run thr gauntlet from no eye protection, to bourkes, to wrap around faceshiled (4" and 6") to goggles. I have yet to experience a problem withe the current goggles I use and keep attached on my helmet. I've been to numerous fires and haven't had a problem. A little cleaning periodically helps as well. I also have and keep goggles on my wildland helmet as well.
These are my comments and do not reflect the opinions of others. I like the goggles and find them to be more protection that the face shields. With 30 years in this business, I am comfortable with my decisions and opinions.

[bgfdchick]

I don't care for goggles because during extrication (which is mainly when I'd wear them) I sweat so much it gathers in the goggles...and there's no air to breathe so they fog up. I prefer the close-fitting safety sunglasses, and lowering my faceshield.

As far as goggles at a fire...I don't find much use for them - I'm wearing the airpack w/facepiece, even during overhaul (after a bad experience of overhauling 20-years of bat-dung in an old farmhouse ceiling!) so to have the goggles on my helmet is just a pain. The shield is fine with me to deflect debris away from my airmask.

I know lots of guys who like them and never would go back. They just don't work for me.

[jeg532]

I think that bgfdchick summed it up pretty well, you just have to see what works for you. I have bourkes on a 1010 and I also have goggles somewhere?? just in case I need them for an inspection, they never come out of my locker though for shift, or maybe thier at home, well you get my point.